Because so many people push aside questions of historic concern, and your commission serves constantly to remind people that there are other considerations than just the economic ones. Thank you very much.
Thank you, Mr. Tyler. 1623 2/22/00, Operating Budget, Bill 000005
Are there any other questions from members of the committee? (No further questions.)
Seeing none, I would ask that the Department of Licenses and Inspections please proceed to the witness table. (Licenses and Inspections witnesses come forward.)
Good afternoon, Commissioner. COMMISSIONER MCLAUGHLIN: Good afternoon.
Thank you for your patience waiting. The stenographer does have a copy of your testimony. It will be printed in full. If you would simply summarize your testimony, we would appreciate it. COMMISSIONER MCLAUGHLIN: Surely. Good afternoon, Council President Verna and other distinguished Members of Council. My name is Edward J. McLaughlin, I'm the Commissioner of Department of Licenses and Inspections. Accompanying me today are my Administrative 1624 2/22/00, Operating Budget, Bill 000005 Services Director, Richard Feldgus; my deputies, First Deputy Commissioner Robert Solvibile, David Perry, Dominic Verdi, and Oliver Thornton. We appreciate this opportunity to present our Fiscal Year 2001 operation budget request to City Council and to provide you with information about the department's recent accomplishments and our plans for the upcoming Fiscal Year. The Department of Licenses and Inspections is requesting a total Fiscal Year 2001 budget of $31,652,530, of which $29,591,057 will be provided through the City's General Fund. In our General Fund budget, we have requested a net increase of $470,287 from our Fiscal Year 2000 estimated obligations to provide for negotiated salary increases for our employees. We are requesting full funding for the General Fund of 452 positions for the department. I would like to summarize our presentation by first speaking about our responsibility for life safety. There are -- there were 35 fire deaths reported in Fiscal Year 1999. The National Fire Protection Agency says 1625 2/22/00, Operating Budget, Bill 000005 that the key to effective life safety is to get people out of the buildings. In that regard, L&I in Fiscal Year 1998 and '99 inspected more than 25,000 multiple-family dwellings requiring smoke detectors an fire alarm systems in those properties. We enforce generally across residential and commercial properties the fire code requiring smoke detectors and fire suppression systems in residential and commercial buildings. In the last eight years, we've demolished 10,615 residential and almost 200 commercial buildings. These are sites for potential crime and fire tragedies. They would no 15 longer occur at those -- obviously, they would no 16 longer occur at those particular locations. In the last Fiscal Year we've cleaned and sealed 2100 additional properties. In Fiscal Year 2000, we conducted a vacant property survey, identifying and issuing violations to seal those properties, for owners to close those properties. We have the best Fire Department in the country. L&I's job is to make sure that you are outside on the sidewalk pointing them to where the fire is. We consider ourselves equal partners in celebrating the fact 1626 2/22/00, Operating Budget, Bill 000005 that we have reduced fire deaths to 35. For our management initiatives, I'd just like to say that we have adopted Harvard Business School's management by walking around theory. What I mean by that is we've reorganized the department so that in the concourse where I'm sure that any elected official in this room would agree, we a long way to go in providing friendlier, more efficient service, we have changed the structure so that where before we had three deputy commissioners responsible for what happened in the concourse, now we have one deputy commissioner who is not sitting in the comfort of the Commissioner's cluster on the 11th floor. That Deputy Commissioner David Perry is walking around in the concourse improving services all the time in the concourse. In addition to that, we have taken 85 percent of all field inspections and put them under, again, one deputy commissioner in the one facility where we had those inspectors, and that deputy commissioner is making improvements. And also fine-tuning the way we treat people on the street. We have a keen sense of awareness that 1627 2/22/00, Operating Budget, Bill 000005 that's a big part of the job ahead of us. Finally, I'd like to talk about technology.
We have applied for a productivity loan to automate the department, to fully automate the department. We have a productivity management meeting -- the productivity loan committee meeting scheduled for March 10th, but really what I'd like you to know is that through the efforts of Deputy Commissioner Oliver Thornton, we have laid the groundwork to receive the automation that we're asking for the loan for. What I mean by that is my experience is sometimes people are so focused on this new computer technology, this new program that's going to solve all of their problems, that by the time they get it, their infrastructure is not ready to accept it. Just the opposite in L&I; We are ready to accept technology that will move us into the 21st century. That's all, and we're here to answer your questions.
Thank you. I have a couple questions, but before I ask them, I want to publicly thank you, Commissioner, and the members of your staff for always, always being 1628 2/22/00, Operating Budget, Bill 000005 very responsive to the requests or complaints that my office receives. COMMISSIONER MCLAUGHLIN: Thank you, Councilwoman.
I wish all of the other departments were as responsive as your department is, and I just want you to know that I personally appreciate it. COMMISSIONER MCLAUGHLIN: I will pass that on.
Mr. McLaughlin, how will the Mayor's blight initiative impact your budget? Will the department be handling all of the City's demolition and clean and seal activity for the City during the Fiscal Year 2001? COMMISSIONER MCLAUGHLIN: I'm really not sure because we don't know what the blight program is yet. You know, I do expect that we have the expertise to assist in that and we do want to stay involved in it, but it will depend on how the Mayor defines that program.
Thank you. On of your testimony, when are 1629 2/22/00, Operating Budget, Bill 000005 you planning on submitting to City Council a proposed permitting fee schedule? And why is this not being done as part of the budget cycle?
Councilwoman Verna, I'm Richard Feldgus, Administrative Services Director for the Department of Licenses and Inspections. The permit fee proposal that we will be submitting will be submitted during this term of Council before you recess in June. The reason it's not part of the budget process is that it is the incident of the department to make sure that this is revenue-neutral so that it will not have any impact on the budget. What we're trying to do is equalize our fees. Right now our fee structure favors new construction over rehab construction. What this new fee permit structure will do is equalize that so that there is no favored treatment given to new construction. And that's particularly important right now in our mind and in the department because we do have a lot of rehab construction going on in the City, a lot of older unused office buildings are being turned into housing, and we want to try to encourage and stimulate that by having this new fee structure. 1630 2/22/00, Operating Budget, Bill 000005
Thank you. The Chair recognizes Councilwoman Tasco.
Thank you very much. Good afternoon. COMMISSIONER MCLAUGHLIN: Good afternoon.
I just, too, want to say thank you so much for the support your office gives. I just think you're one of the most important departments, if not the most important department in the City. I just wish we could give you more staff because I think part of the problems we might experience is because you just don't have enough staff to follow through on a lot of concerns we have. COMMISSIONER MCLAUGHLIN: Thank you.
And I must say special thanks to Bob Solvibile because you know I work very closely with him in the Logan area and he's extremely responsive, as well as your staff in Permits Department who work with my staff, Marion Johnson, she's my zoning czar, and we want 1631 2/22/00, Operating Budget, Bill 000005 the thank you for your services. I just have a couple questions, not very complicated. I just want to call your attention to something. We did a walk-through in the Logan area, not in the sinking area, but the targeted area above and we noticed that you all had done a very good job of sealing the homes that were vacant, but I notice that the tops of the buildings were not sealed. I think if going to preserve those properties, because we're trying to get developers to come in and rehab those houses, it could save money in the long run because we do get subsidies from the City if they are closed entirely so that we will protect them from the weather. So that's just a comment. You don't have to respond to that, but that's something that I see. COMMISSIONER MCLAUGHLIN: I would just like to tell you that we have identified the two census tracts just above the Logan triangle.
Mm-hmm. COMMISSIONER MCLAUGHLIN: We have mapped that area. I'm working with Carl Green at the Philadelphia Housing Authority. We have now a 1632 2/22/00, Operating Budget, Bill 000005 map of that area with all of the publicly owned buildings identified on that map.
Could we get a copy of that? COMMISSIONER MCLAUGHLIN: Yes, absolutely.
Okay. COMMISSIONER MCLAUGHLIN: We'll work with you very closely on that because we're at the stage right now where Carl and I were trying to schedule a meeting with Stephanie --
Franklin Suber? COMMISSIONER MCLAUGHLIN: No, I'm sorry. Joyce Wilkerson. Joyce Wilkerson to propose to her that this area would be a logical area to, you know, spend some of the blight money.
We're having that ongoing discussion, too, so I'd like to have a copy of your list because it may overlap the list that we have and help us better to identify those that are public and those that are not. 1633 2/22/00, Operating Budget, Bill 000005 COMMISSIONER MCLAUGHLIN: Absolutely.
Thank you. The other thing is, I have -- one of the concerns we have when we go before Zoning, when individuals go before the Zoning Board that are requesting a variance for a multifamily home, they have been given a license to -- for a multifamily home. I hope I'm asking this question correctly. But then they find out that they have to have a variance in order to convert the home into a multifamily dwelling. They will apply for a license -- I have it backwards, I think.
The way that works, to expedite the license process a number of years ago, the department stopped doing the zoning checks prior to issuing the licenses to make sure that process went faster. We then back-check to do make sure that they have proper zoning. That's why they get told that after they have applied, they brought it to our attention now that the property is going to be a multifamily and if don't conform with the existing zoning, then they have to go to the Zoning Board to get a variance.
That causes us 1634 2/22/00, Operating Budget, Bill 000005 problem in the Zoning Board because we don't want single-family houses being converted to multifamily housing. So I would think if you could check to see if the area is zoned residential or if there's a restriction on multifamily dwellings that you don't issue the license.
One of the things we hope to be able to do with the productivity loan that we've requested is that those two operations will be brought together by the computer so that we will not have to manually check. That will be an electronic check and it won't delay the license process, but it will guarantee that people are not given a multifamily license unless they do have required zoning before get license. So that's something we are working on, Councilwoman. Once have the productivity loan in place and we get out new system in place, we should be able to do that, and we hope that will be within a year.
One of my favorite questions is Fifth Street. As you know, Fifth Street has been a real concern of mine in that we get a number of zoning variances requests for 1635 2/22/00, Operating Budget, Bill 000005 wholesale. The community has definitely stated they wanted that area to remain retail, one for their use and the other because the community can't stand the tractor-trailers, the parking is not adequate and all of that. But we're constantly fighting illegal shops that are set up for wholesale and they'll add retail, but you can't go in and buy retail. They just add it as a way to cut down on any check. I would hope that you all will give us your strong support in trying to keep that corridor a retail corridor as oppose to a wholesale. Every week there's a request before the Zoning Board for a change in the variance to wholesale, and it's not in the interest of the community to do that. It will just destroy the whole character of that neighborhood. COMMISSIONER MCLAUGHLIN: That's another thing that this software that we hope to buy will do for us. It will allow us to flag certain things. If Councilpeople call us and tell us that they want us to screen something for them, to notify them when something is happening, you know, or to put some other process internally in 1636 2/22/00, Operating Budget, Bill 000005 place, this software will allow us to do it. Right now we can't do that electronically and it's very hard, you know, with the numbers of people who are coming to the counter and the different issue to screen effectively in that way.
Okay. I think that's it. I think that's it. Thank you.
Thank you. Commissioner, I just have one question to ask, if I may. When we ask for a house to be cleaned and sealed, can you give me the reasoning why we just seal the first floor and not the second floor of the building? (Witness comes forward.)
Good afternoon. Identify yourself for the record.
My name is Robert Solvibile, Deputy Commissioner of Licenses and Inspections. A lot of times, Councilwoman, it's a matter of safety. You can't do it from the inside, for whatever reason and they can't do it by ladders and we do not have lift equipment to put the workers in a bucket so they could do it 1637 2/22/00, Operating Budget, Bill 000005 from the outside.
So it's not the regular course that we just do the first and not the second floor?
No, it's a matter of fact. As a matter of fact, my instructions to them are to do second floors all cases because if we're trying to preserve it, it makes no sense if we let the weather in.
So it's where they safely can't do it we'll not seal the second floor.
Because I have seen many properties where they have just sealed the first floor and the second floor is wide open so. . .
A lot of times, Councilwoman, when they open the building, they have a better view of the building inspector and the flooring system is missing and they report it back to us and we attack it from the dangerous building front. And they will seal the first floor to keep people out, though,. 1638 2/22/00, Operating Budget, Bill 000005
Thank you. The Chair recognizes Councilman Nutter.
Thank you, Madam Chair. Good afternoon, Commissioner. COMMISSIONER MCLAUGHLIN: Good afternoon, Councilman.
Commissioner from our testimony and in other various documents, you're sharing with us, I believe, the department anticipates the cleaning of 2400 lots this fiscal year and I believe the same number for next year; is that correct? COMMISSIONER MCLAUGHLIN: Yes, that's correct.
Now, what's involved in the cleaning of these lots, and on average what does it cost to clean a lot in Philadelphia?
The cleaning process itself is fairly straightforward. It's a matter of going in -- we typically go in with our laboring crews and just remove all the debris off the lot, bag it and then take it away in City 1639 2/22/00, Operating Budget, Bill 000005 vehicles. The average cost for that is approximately $1500 per lot to clean up.
Based on the amount of time that our people have to devote and put a crew out there and then fringe benefits and so forth. so that it's a matter of the bags and the vehicles that we have to have the support the employees the fringe benefits and then costing all of that out.
So it's about $1500 for an average-size lot. What's an average-size lot.
Well, an average-size lot, the typical lot is, you know, your North Philadelphia row home that was demolished. It may be a couple of those put together, so you're talking typically anywhere from about 30- to 50- 60-foot dimensions; 30-foot wide, 50-, 60-foot deep.
Does that vary at all from your average rowhouse in West Philadelphia or South Philadelphia, Northwest, Northeast. 1640 2/22/00, Operating Budget, Bill 000005
I mean, nothing particular special about North Philadelphia, is there?
No problem, sir. I see you out the corner of my eye, I saw you jumping up and down. It's okay.
Larger lots where you're talking about the bigger ones, we would go in with machinized equipment frontend loader and have to utilize that.
The number that you are planning to do this fiscal year or next fiscal year, is that more or less or about the same that you've done over the past few fiscal years.
Roughly the same. The mix may be changing slightly towards lots, but the total aggregate number is basically the same.
You're talking 1641 2/22/00, Operating Budget, Bill 000005 about the aggregate of about 4200?
And the mix being between the vacant lots and demolitions?
Now, over the past few years, has the Department ever had occasion to revisit a vacant lot that had been cleaned in a previous fiscal year?
And of the 2400 that you plan to do or will have done at the end of this fiscal year, are you able to determine how many of those had ever been treated before?
30 percent, preproductivity guesstimate, 30 percent. 1642 2/22/00, Operating Budget, Bill 000005
Of the lots that you plan to do this year you had done in the previous year?
In some lots, Councilman -- there's a synagogue, I believe, in Southwest Philadelphia, we work with them yearly to help them clean it out. So there's some things that we work with community groups on an annual basis, you know, to clean the neighborhood so that's counted in the repetition.
Because the weeds still continue to grow, things like that.
Oh, absolutely. That's the nature of weeds. So if you do 30 percent a year are from previous years and that's about 600 times $1500, we're now up in the $900,000 range of repeat activity at these lots; is that a fair estimate?
The answer I gave you for the average cost was for both cleaning an sealing 1643 2/22/00, Operating Budget, Bill 000005 buildings and lots.
The average cost I gave you was for cleaning and sealing buildings and lots.
Lots are much cheaper to clean on average. Lots are about $500.
Okay, fine. Because that was my question. My question was, how much does it cost to clean a lot. I didn't say anything about a building.
So the real number is about 600 or so lots a year from previous years times $500.
Okay. Has there ever been any discussion about how to cut down on repeat visits to the same lot? I mean, it's nothing particularly special that drives the 1644 2/22/00, Operating Budget, Bill 000005 personnel to just want to have to go back to that particular lot, I mean, it's not that they have a unique experience there or they just love that location or something. I mean, why wouldn't we want them going to 600 other lots?
We found, Councilman, that a program that was initiated by the Department several years ago involving the community, community clean and seal, we supply them materials tools on Saturday, and actually we'll do it in the summer, in the spring, in the fall. We assist the community group. We supply the material, they clean it up. This has been very successful because they involve the children of the community and they don't trash it as much as they used to.
So we found that successful in having them work with us to do it, and that has cut it down.
I appreciate that. I'm also, though, trying to figure out how to make sure that we cut down to the greatest extent possible our requirement to revisit places that 1645 2/22/00, Operating Budget, Bill 000005 we've already done work on, whether it's through vegetation management plans, some kind of barrier, whether a fence, bollards, trees or anything else. I mean, the long-term strategy here obviously can't be that we're going to keep going back to these same locations as we continue to demolish 1800, 1900, 2000 buildings which adds to the inventory -- not that we own them, but the areas that we have responsibility for in terms of vacant lots. This is before we even get to blight elimination.
I agree. That's why answered the way did I before, Councilman. I found the most effective way, whether you have fence, Jersey barrier, is community involvement. Somehow the community being involved in the cleaning of the lot and the keeping it clean, otherwise it continues to be just a debris-laiden piece of land.
Gotcha. Now, Commissioner, in Appendix 3 of the five-year plan on there is a line item that says Licenses and Inspections demolitions, and projected for FY '01 is the amount $10,827,743. 1646 2/22/00, Operating Budget, Bill 000005 In FY '02, that number is 0. In FY '03, that number is 0. In FY '04, that number is 0. In FY '05, that number is -- take a guess.
Zero. I get the impression, at least from reading that document, that you're about to go out of the demolition business because your budget is apparently being zeroed out in terms of the five-year plan beyond this year. Council President asked the question with regard to how might blight elimination program affect your department, And I heard your answer. I didn't hear you say anything about that. So I'm trying to understand is there a connection between the blight elimination program and the zeroing out of your demolition budget? Do you have any information on that? COMMISSIONER MCLAUGHLIN: I don't have any official information on that except to say that we do expect to be involved in the blight program and the money that we'll be using there would be blight elimination money.
Well, how are you going to deal with emergency demolitions? A 1647 2/22/00, Operating Budget, Bill 000005 building goes up flames, Bob Solvibile is running around at night trying to find out what's going on telling everybody out at the site what to do except the fire marshal and the fire commissioner, and then you've got this piece of hulk building left. He wants to get a contractor during the next morning, do a curbside demolition for emergency purposes because he wants a crane out there 8 o'clock because I'm bugging him to death. How are you going to pay for that? COMMISSIONER MCLAUGHLIN: We'll just do it the same way we do it now. The money's going to be someplace in the City. We'd have an emergency type of bid, and then when it came time to pay, we'd go into whatever bucket of money we will be drawing from.
But your earlier answer was it's not cheer to you for the moment why this is the way it in the five-year plan, is that your response? COMMISSIONER MCLAUGHLIN: I'm saying that we in our department don't have a real clear picture yet and I imagine because the Mayor hasn't told any of us, you know, what the program is yet. 1648 2/22/00, Operating Budget, Bill 000005
Gotcha. I see you. You know I want to talk to you. (Rob Dubow comes forward.)
Dominic was hiding you there for a while but... Mr. Dubow you, know what Joe Lewis said, right?
I try to find the biggest person in the room and sit behind them.
Can you explain the information in the Five-Year Plan and why the demolition budget has been zeroed out.
It is under the assumption that demolitions will be handled through the blight removal plan. Obviously, the details of that program haven't been sorted out, so it might 1649 2/22/00, Operating Budget, Bill 000005 be that by the time you get to 2002 it will look slightly different from the way it looks in the plan now.
You don't necessarily know the details, but you've made the assumption that the money's going to be somewhere else, and where is that somewhere else? Where did that $10 million go?
The theory was that it would be housed in an authority, maybe the RDA, but we've never really gotten to specific so I'm not sure. I mean, it's not clear how it will actually work in the end, but that was the assumption.
How would we have -- what was your phraseology? How would we house $10 million of General Fund money in an authority, would we transfer it to them?
No, the assumption was they were going to issue debt, and so through the debt, they would have funding through that debt.
So the real housing location would really be over in the Sinking Fund item? 1650 2/22/00, Operating Budget, Bill 000005
We have a draft of the letter and it should be over within a few days.
All right, thank you. Commissioner, why has the encapsulation program, at least from the testimony, expected to drop from 259 properties in FY '99 to 75 properties in '00?
The 259 represents the number of contracts that have been let. Some kind of confusion in that number. We apologize for that. When we're talking about contracts, we could issue multiple contracts on the same building so that the 75 will actually generate more contracts because we'll do one contract for the roof, another contract for the drainage, possibly a third contract to seal up building. So the 259 is the total number of contracts.
So it's not really 259 properties, it's 259 contracts?
And what do those 259 represent as it relates to properties?
About 150 in two years, so we'll be pretty much commensurate with what we're doing. I should point out to you that --
Well, hold on for a second. If the other part of the testimony is 75 properties in FY '00, does that now mean that -- it doesn't really mean 75 properties? Did you mean 75 contracts? COMMISSIONER MCLAUGHLIN: No, I mean 75 property.
Well, then you just said that the 99 which is 259 contracts, really represents 150 properties.
Since we started, yes. 1652 2/22/00, Operating Budget, Bill 000005
Okay, all right. What would the department need -- I mean, I'm appreciative for the 75 properties, but, I mean, I think we have a half a million residential structures in the City, you're demolishing 1800 or so a year, and through this program I guess we're saving 75?
The current funding mechanism for that encapsulation program is utilizing money from OHCD.
We have a limited budget. Total for all of our repairs programs in the department is approximately $450,000. That includes our tenant repair program which covers heat and drainage repairs and tenant-occupied building.
Out of that same pot. So what happens is that the monies that we don't use for that program, for tenant repairs, we typically are able to shift over and use for encapsulation. That's been our funding mechanism up to this 1653 2/22/00, Operating Budget, Bill 000005 point.
And that would include a roof, sealing up the building, drainage.
And in one of your service-level documents, it seemed to indicate that average demolition is now running in the $10,000.
Correct. COMMISSIONER MCLAUGHLIN: That's exactly what the blight program is going to address.
What do you mean by that, Commissioner? 1654 2/22/00, Operating Budget, Bill 000005 COMMISSIONER MCLAUGHLIN: Well, the encapsulation, I've talked to Joyce Wilkerson about that, the encapsulation is part of what the Mayor is talking about when he's talking about addressing blight. It's not just the demolition, it's not just the clean and seal, it is about encapsulation and further to shorten the process so that people can actually get into those encapsulated houses.
How are they going to do that? COMMISSIONER MCLAUGHLIN: I don't know how he plans -- he plans on shortening whatever the -- the process that's in place to allow the City to dispose of a property takes a year or two years.
So they're going to shorten that as a part of the blight elimination program? COMMISSIONER MCLAUGHLIN: I have heard that there's people looking at that process, trying to shorten that process. That's an issue that gets brought up at the town meetings that the Mayor is currently holding. 1655 2/22/00, Operating Budget, Bill 000005
I'm glad you mentioned that because I've generally been under the impression that the bulk of blight elimination was primarily geared toward demolition.
Councilman, and also the encapsulation program which started two years ago is meant to stop the spread. The houses that are being demolished, it's too late. We're trying to get a block, to refresh everyone's memory, with one or two vacants in good repair and stop that one vacant from spreading to others. That's the intent of the encapsulation program. Now, sometimes we'll stretch it depending on the block.
It's meant just to do just drainage, roof, and a good seal job with painted wood.
Okay. COMMISSIONER MCLAUGHLIN: I would just like to mention that met with the Board of Realtors trying to get them. We're working with the three CDCs on a pilot program to increase the number of encapsulations we do. The Board of Realtors, we suggested that if they're having 1656 2/22/00, Operating Budget, Bill 000005 trouble selling a house on a street that maybe they would be agents for us in reporting the house that needs to be encapsulated and then actually participating in trying to sell that particular property.
Okay. Madam Chair, I will not take further advantage than I already have. I have other questions, but I'm way beyond my time.
Thank you. The Chair recognizes Councilman Clarke.
Thank you, Madam Chair. Good afternoon, gentlemen. COMMISSIONER MCLAUGHLIN: Good afternoon, Councilman.
A couple of questions. Let me get to the easy one first. How many vacant properties are currently in the City of Philadelphia, structures? COMMISSIONER MCLAUGHLIN: 22,512 smaller properties, residential properties -- I'm sorry -- right. 841 large vacant properties and 730 large nonresidential buildings. 1657 2/22/00, Operating Budget, Bill 000005
How did you get at those numbers? Was it through inspections, visual inspections? COMMISSIONER MCLAUGHLIN: (Nods.)
You sent out inspectors on the street, took pictures or just wrote down vacant, vacant, vacant, vacant? COMMISSIONER MCLAUGHLIN: Inspectors went from block to block throughout the entire City.
Some information has recently come to me based on the Board of Revision of Tax's estimate, and they have numbers upwards of 50,000. Can you explain the disparity in those numbers? Where are the real numbers at? Particularly given the blight removal program that we hopefully will embark upon soon and that will obviously be a substantial change in numbers. Are you familiar with that number at all? COMMISSIONER MCLAUGHLIN: Yes, I am. I'm not sure what the problem is except to say that our inspectors actually walked block by block with sheets that told them what properties were on that block. I'm kind of at a loss to explain why 1658 2/22/00, Operating Budget, Bill 000005 they came out with that particular number. All I could -- yeah, and we're also testing the numbers just to make sure that we have every expectation. We tested ourselves during the process and our error rate was very good, very understandable. Now we're actually retesting. We're going back out and counting a few selected sites again just to make sure. That was what we're doing as a result of that number coming out. I'm not sure I'm not sure what the base of Board of Revision of Taxes is.
Have talked to them about it? Have you asked them why they have 50,000 and you have 25. COMMISSIONER MCLAUGHLIN: I take them for their word that that's what they got in the system. That's why we're checking our numbers. I would have more confidence in our numbers. We have people that are used to walking the blocks, are used to identifying buildings.
My question was -- COMMISSIONER MCLAUGHLIN: And we are talking about computers where maybe records aren't updated. 1659 2/22/00, Operating Budget, Bill 000005
My question was have you talked to the Board of Revision of Taxes as to how they came to that 50,000 number specifically. COMMISSIONER MCLAUGHLIN: The answer to that is no, we haven't talked to them, but I don't know what they do about demolitions. In the last ten years -- eight years we demolished more than 10,000 properties, and I don't know if they've been subtracted out of that database or not. They're vacant lots now.
How soon do you anticipate we'll get accurate reading based on what projection is and -- COMMISSIONER MCLAUGHLIN: I think you have one.
So you're going to go with your numbers as it relates to the blight removal program? COMMISSIONER MCLAUGHLIN: Yes.
Okay. Stop-and-goes, these take-out delis with the malt liquor is something I've been on a miniature crusade on recently. And in talking to some state 1660 2/22/00, Operating Budget, Bill 000005 individuals who regulate the Liquor Control Board, it's my understanding that these facilities are required to have separate locations for where they sell malt liquor versus where they sell the other goods like candies and the other things that children may purchase. They said that that is law and that L&I is responsible for enforcing that. Can you give me a sense of why we're not enforcing that and it doesn't appear that that's being done anywhere? (Witness comes forward.)
Dominic Verdi, Deputy Commissioner Councilman. Councilman, we do enforce that issue. We have been working along with the State to help us identify certain businesses. And when we do identify it, we're trying to enforce it the best we can.
Can you give me an example as to where? Because I've never seen a location that has a separate selling point for the malt liquor and a separate location for --
The state regs indicate that you cannot sell malt liquor -- you know, like right now a lot of these places they have these glass cases, glass fronts and they have a little drawer. They're saying that you cannot sell malt liquor and other goods and services such candies and things that kids may purchase out of the same station.
The only thing we enforce is the issue as far as the zoning -- as far as the sale of malt liquor. As far as being sold separately, no, the State may have a regulation but it doesn't fall on us.
No. We had a with LCE, we had a discussion in reference to that one time with LCE and it was somewhat their jurisdiction. We never heard back from them at all.
Their jurisdiction as it relates to policy or the enforcement officer? 1662 2/22/00, Operating Budget, Bill 000005
So the Liquor Control Board is responsible for the operation of the store.
The Liquor Control Enforcement Unit would -- if there's any State regulation involving a liquor establishment which beer and malt liquor comes under, Liquor Control enforcement would have jurisdiction over that issue if it's a State law. COMMISSIONER MCLAUGHLIN: We don't enforce State laws.
I understand that. What I'm not understanding is that if there's a stop-and-go, take-out deli, whatever you want to call it, that sells malt liquor, you're saying because they sell the malt liquor, you no longer as L&I have any responsibility for any regulations associated with that store?
We have regulations on the licenses business, privilege license, associated licenses and sales licenses, but liquor license itself comes under the enforcement of unit of LCE. 1663 2/22/00, Operating Budget, Bill 000005
No, there's regulations under their liquor license. In some cases, the liquor license -- their regulations under the alcohol or the sale of alcohol, there's certain regulations that do follow that they have to apply to, all liquor establishments do. Those are strictly enforced by Liquor Control Enforcement. What we'll do is look for any City licenses that are involved or any zone-related issues.
Okay. I hate to belabor the point, but the part of store that sells everything else, that's your responsibility.
So that's why I'm asking you. If the entire store is your responsibility, then you have some level of enforcement as to what's sold in that store regardless of what it is. What I'm asking you is if the Liquor Control Board is telling me that you're not supposed to sell malt liquor out of same station that you sell everything else, then 1664 2/22/00, Operating Budget, Bill 000005 you're somehow responsible for enforcing that.
No, they're responsible. COMMISSIONER MCLAUGHLIN: They're responsible for enforcing it.
Liquor Control Enforcement, if the Liquor Control Board is telling you, yes, we have a regulation that says you can't sell malt liquor in same location as sell other alcoholic beverages, well, that enforcement comes under Liquor Control Enforcement. There's two agencies, LCB is the one that issues the license; LCE is the one who enforces it. LCE would regulate that issue. We have no control over how he sells his merchandise. We just make sure it's licensed.
If you're aware of this particular regulation, your guy comes in and he inspects the store for whatever reason and sees that they're selling this malt liquor in the same station as they're selling everything else and you know this not to be legal, do you then contact the Liquor Control Board and tell them to come down because we have an illegal operation taking place?
When we see irregularities in liquor establishments, we a very good rapport 1665 2/22/00, Operating Budget, Bill 000005 with LCE. We just give them a call or do a fax to them and say we need this to be looked at, and they'll send an agent out. How fast they send the agent is beyond our control.
So basically what I need to do is make sure you have this particular law because it seems like you're not familiar with it.
Thank you. Question with respect to information an technology. A year or so I was actually meeting with Deputy Commissioner Oliver Thornton and they were trying to get a productivity loan, talking to Charley McPherson, and it's my understanding that this was going to afford an opportunity for inspectors on the street to have some sort of process, some sort of a hand-held computerization. First of all, where is that at? And second of all, how would it help enhance ability of these inspectors to do a better job on the street, a more efficient job and to basically service us in the district? Can you give me a sense of where we are with that. 1666 2/22/00, Operating Budget, Bill 000005 COMMISSIONER MCLAUGHLIN: We've had a process that we've been going through defining our productivity loan application. We're to the point now where we think we've got that done, and on March the 10th, there is a productivity loan committee meeting, you know, where our application will be discussed. Aside -- and that is to buy the software to automate the department which is something that you kind of have to do before you get the hand-helds to operate. With one exception, Hanson Technologies has offered for a pilot program for us. We're buying five hand-helds to pilot the whole issue of hand-held devices for our inspectors to use on the street. Those five hand-helds are approved by everybody that has to approve them and they're in the purchase process right now. We have the money for them. It's just a matter of getting them through the system, to get the actual hand-helds in our position. Hanson Technologies has volunteered to put the software in place so that we can test, field-test the five hand-helds. The reason that we think that our enforcement people will be better off, that the process will be improved, is 1667 2/22/00, Operating Budget, Bill 000005 because part of what will be in the officer's hand will be the entire code so that if it is part of the Philadelphia Code that there be two points of sale in a stop and go that that information would be there for our inspector.
So right now, your priority is purchasing the systems that will be in the MSB or wherever they are, the general systems, and you'll get the hand-held as we go, or you're going to try this pilot program with the Hanson model you said? COMMISSIONER MCLAUGHLIN: I would say that we have many priorities across the surface of our technology efforts. And the hand-held pilot program, we're just not sure that inspectors will benefit. The other part of what would happen is the inspectors have census tracts that they're responsible for. So the inspector would download everything or upload everything into his hand-held device that pertains to those particular census tracts where inspector is going to work, like who has permits, who has violations, that type of thing. So we'll make inspector more efficient. That sounds good, we're just not sure that that's 1668 2/22/00, Operating Budget, Bill 000005 the way that it will eventually be done. That's why we ordered five of those hand-helds and that's why we're calling it a pilot program. That is not holding up our effort to automate the whole rest of the department.
Has that been done in any other municipalities with the hand-held system? I mean, do we have a basis for even attempting to do this? COMMISSIONER MCLAUGHLIN: Other departments in the City are using hand-held. Other inspectional forces are using hand-helds. The Police Department are using mobile data terminals in their cars. We don't have cars. We're talking about people walking around.
Are they working in the other departments? COMMISSIONER MCLAUGHLIN: I think everybody's happy. But if you want Oliver Thornton to come up, he can talk to you about our efforts to look, not just in the City, but all around the country and, in fact, around the world. 1669 2/22/00, Operating Budget, Bill 000005
The reason I'm asking those question, my understanding is this is not something that we invented and this is apparently happening in other locales and you're now telling me, which I didn't know, that we're using it in other departments. Why aren't we using it in L&I since this is one of the departments that probably get more complaints than any other -- I don't know, maybe the Streets Department after the hearings. But this is one of the departments that receives the most complaints out of any department in the City, and I'm wondering why we just don't go ahead. And if you want Mr. Thornton to respond to that, that would be helpful. COMMISSIONER MCLAUGHLIN: Yeah, I'd like Oliver to come up, but there is an issue of the complexity of L&I and, you know, the need for us to have that. It's very complicated, The whole process. And I think maybe I have a lot of experience on the police side and the police enforce the crimes code, one code. L&I enforces the building code, the zoning code, the electrical code, the plumbing code, and I could go on with 1670 2/22/00, Operating Budget, Bill 000005 weights and measures issues and things like that. So that the complexity level is high. That's why we're proceeding more cautiously, doing a pilot program just to see if all of that complexity can load into one of these little things. (Witness comes forward.)
Oliver Thornton, Deputy Commissioner. Councilman, the idea behind the hand-helds is that right now the inspectors go out to locations and they have a limited amount of information with them when they go out. The hand-helds having a sufficient storage would give them the ability to take most information. It goes hand in hand with a another part of the project which is taking all of L&I's property-based information, whether it be permits licenses, or what-have-you, and put that information in one single place, On a database. Then the inspector being able to go out to that location, have that information with him when he or she does that inspection so that would help to facilitate inspection. The other thing is the delay time that it takes to get that information, 1671 2/22/00, Operating Budget, Bill 000005 the results of that inspection back into the system so that any questions can be answered and things that need to be handle in an expeditious manner can be done. So the hand held device has a docking station back at the office which allows them to come back in and that information can be immediately downloaded into the database. Right now system is such that that piece of paper that the inspection is on is given to a clerk who then has to enter that information in. And depending on the time of day that it comes back or the workload of that particular clerk, there could be some delay in the time that it takes to get that information into the system so that things can be acted on immediately if they have to be.